| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The below needs some work, but here are my thoughts:
Every player only has a limited time in a day that she can post, as does the gm, so the fastest solution involves making optimal use of the post a player or gm can get in.
A battle in PbP advances through posts, so there's two things you (GM or player) can do:
- Post more often
- Be more effective in a single post
The first part is very hard to control. Pretty much every PbP advertises as 'at least a single post per day', but only very few players, or GMs, actually attain that posting rate. Still, if you have agreed that particular posting rate, you may also set out rules for when a player does not post in a given timespan.
When a player does not respond within a predefined timeframe (e.g. 24 hrs), a GM can either
- put a pc on delay (least effort, fastest, least player-friendly)
- device his own action for the PC (most effort, fastest, more player-friendly)
- have the other players post an action for the PC (little effort, slower, most player-friendly)
Effectiveness is where the real gain can be made:
On the GM side, if you can make only a single post a day, you have to make sure that post counts. There's two thing you can do to ensure that happens:
First, streamline your battle. Make sure your battle is not a back and forth between a single player and you. For example, if you have five groups of bad guys, and you make a single post a day where you resolve one group, your round will take five days, your combat perhaps two weeks.
Set up your battles so that you need only a single GM post per round. Options:
- group your baddies (least effort, least complicated)
- interleave baddies actions with players' but resolve everything at once (more effort, requires players to make contingent actions)
Second, you must avoid confusion (not the spell, using that is fine) at all costs. This avoids players coming back to you with questions, or players not action in time because they don't realise their turn is up.
Avoid confusion at all costs. Some basic, but effective tools are:
- Keeping an initiative tracker at the bottom of your post, which PCs that are 'up' in bold
- Recount every action of the player
- Describe every action of the baddies
- For saves or other actions that require a roll, give the DC and put the 'bad stuff' in a spoiler. This avoids a player not knowing what to do until she knows the outcome of the roll.
Avoiding confusion also holds for players, so what they can do
- List the type of weapon and the target for an attack
- Break down bonuses in the attack roll (i.e. type -2 +1 for a PA with inspire courage, not just -1)
- Describe which abilities you're using. If they're rare, provide a link
- If your action depends on somebody else acting, or something happening, create contingent actions. My preferred method is putting the actions in a spoiler, e.g. one spoiler for 'When the blob fails his save' and another for 'When the blob succeeds.
With the above, and a GM and players that are relatively consistent with regards to the time of day they post in, you can have a round per day:
- GM post the combat actions for a round
- Players all post their actions
- GM resolves the round and posts actions for the next.
----
TL;DR
- Group your baddies
- Post regularly
- Make every post count
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If your action depends on somebody else acting, or something happening, create contingent actions. My preferred method is putting the actions in a spoiler, e.g. one spoiler for 'When the blob fails his save' and another for 'When the blob succeeds.
From the player end, I do this one often, usually if as Kludde said I can see my character doing two or three different things depending on how the flow of battle is going. It's also sometimes handy if you anticipate not being able to post again for awhile. For example, my last job involved 12 hour shifts plus 2 hours round trip driving so if I posted a combat action before going to bed before working the next day, it could easily be nearly 24 hours before I'd be in a position to post again.
As a GM, I'm a big fan of grouping the baddies. I think it makes the combat a little less dynamic, but unless you KNOW you have everyone checking frequently, the boost to speed is really important.
Make sure all the players know to just post when their turn is up; they don't need to wait for their specific spot in initiative.
--
I also really want my players to make things clear for me. Have their AC listed (preferably every round when they post their actions) along with any other defensive notes I might need to know. Their character sheet should have basic weapon/damage info available for me to easily find in case I need to DMPC them, as well as spells available.
--
Either/or actions are also really helpful.
--
A lot of times, I'll handwave the last round of combat or two. It gives the PCs a little boost, since they're may take a hit less or two and use a little fewer resources, but the time save is worth it.
--
One of the biggest things that annoys me as a GM is when I don't pay enough attention -- a quick post may end a bad guy and I don't check in enough to resolve that, meaning we have to wait for everyone to post. That's something I need to work on being better at.
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Group the baddies, but also group the PCs. If Alice, Bob, Carol and Dwayne are up next before the baddies' next turn, don't require them to post in order. If Alice is first, but is only online about an hour before when you normally post, then the whole game freezes for nearly 24 hours, waiting for one player—all while the other three players are logging on but unable to contribute. If you clump them instead, then you can just say "Party up!" and when you come back the next day, everybody's posted and you can do the next round.
Also, don't be afraid to roll the PCs' dice for them when stuff happens off-turn, like when your baddies force saves. The worst thing is to say "Make a [whatever] save", wait a whole posting cycle for the save, then finally be able to finish the baddies' turn. Slightly better but still not great is putting up a spoiler with the DC, containing the results. It's an improvement, but (for example) the cleric whose turn it is might be ready with some healing or condition removal and therefore need to wait for the other players to roll their saves before they can execute their turn, so you're right back to waiting a whole posting cycle. Instead, I roll my players' saves for them and just tell them the results all in one post.
Relatedly, I require all my players to include a "stat line" in their profiles. Anything posted in the "Classes/Levels" section of the profile is visible beneath their name on their Gameplay posts, so I have them include current HP, AC, saves, Perception, and so forth for easy reference, both by me (the GM) and their fellow players. I also require spell descriptions and such in the profile. Never let the game get interrupted by someone needing to ask how something works when it could be at your fingertips.
One thing I've done that really struggled with is giving out the AC of the bad guy after the first round. Something like:
Silverhide werewolf ranger (AC 17/12/16)
I didn't want to, as I prefer the theater of the unknown in my games, but it allows my players to know whether an attack succeeds and post accordingly. It has worked better than expected.
One thing I've done that really struggled with is giving out the AC of the bad guy after the first round. Something like:
Silverhide werewolf ranger (AC 17/12/16)
I didn't want to, as I prefer the theater of the unknown in my games, but it allows my players to know whether an attack succeeds and post accordingly. It has worked better than expected.
That's where your description can come in - the player posts their action without assuming a result, and you recap the players' actions with their results. AKA, your player might post:
Allen swings his greatsword at his foe with brutal force.
If your group is fighting something with AC7 (say, an invalid old woman -.-), your post would include:
Allen swings his greatsword, and the blade shears through his foe, bringing her to the ground.
If your group is fighting, you know, anything else, the results post would instead include:
Allen swings his greatsword at his foe, but at the last moment, she dodges out of the way, leaving the blade slicing through empty air.
Include each action, along with results, in turn and that way you have a nice, neat recap of what's happened each round. Here is an example where I've used this strategy (see the posts above it for my players' actions).
I also can't echo enough the benefits of a "group turn" rather than making players wait for specific initiatives before posting. I've played both ways, and the group turn is vastly better. I do usually roll initiative rolls individually for my players, to ensure that those who have invested into initiative still gain benefit from it, but that should only matter for the first turn; after the quick ones and the baddies have acted, everyone is essentially back together and group turns should take over.
Rennaivx: I do use the descriptive post. I've just found that when players know if they hit, they can better use their post to advance the combat.
Advance directives, for characters. Lots of GMs ask for saves and spots being made ahead of time. You can also preroll check for traps, tell what spells you are always ready to cast, ect.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A method I am applying to my games with apparent success is turn stacking.
It is intended to ease when each person can post, included the GM. The main idea is so people can keep posting at their own pace and both they can still make an impact to the game and play as much as the other players, but the combat keeps advancing at a regular basis.
How it works
Whenever the GM finds a time spot to place his post she (or he) checks what players are still pending to state their actions. If one, or two in large groups, has not played her/his turn yet, the GM resolves the turn nevertheless, executes enemies actions, sets up the new status line and advances one round giving up initiative once more to the PCs.
Those players that have yet not acted are granted an extra turn on behalf of the turn they have not enjoyed in the previous round. I usually mark this on the initiative tracker by a (x2) next to the name of the character.
The benefit is the GM can advance rounds more often, because he can post when it is possible for her or him. Same for the players. If one player can check the boards less frequently, he still can keep playing as much as the others but the game does not have to fit to his pace. It allows much more everybody to post when they can, rather than feel pressed not to slow the combat round. This way the game pace descends much more to GM availability rather than the busiest person in the group availability.
The drawback is rounds become a bit fuzzy sometimes. The GM and the players have to be lenient and have good will, specially when it comes to when spells and effects start taking effect and when they end.
Requirements for this to really work are grouped initiative and resolution of actions by posting order rather than initiative order.
I leave here an example of our Shackled City AP chapter 1 final boss combat. Despite this being a long and very combat heavy chapter we run through it in less than 4 months thanks to an awesome group of players with a good posting rate (consistently 1 or 2 a day or at least each 2 days) and the use of techniques as those exposed in this thread.